Oregon pharmacists I salute you!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

MountainPharmD

custodiunt illud simplex
Lifetime Donor
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Messages
4,576
Reaction score
339
Members don't see this ad :)
That is so awesome!! Good job, Oregon Pharmacists!!! Now, if only the rest of the boards will follow. Texas next, please.
 
I suspect spending by chain stores on lobbying will increase tomorrow, and someone in a room somewhere is developing "patient centered workflow reform" aimed at showing the chains are doing something but really don't do much of anything at all.
 
Vague law that will neither be enforced or change the practice of pharmacy in Oregon.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
With the profession of pharmacy divided into a million different factions and organizations, its nice to finally see a unified voice that is reflective of the way we are treated :love:
 
Vague law that will neither be enforced or change the practice of pharmacy in Oregon.
Bucking the trend with you on this one, Its Z.

Sure at first glance this sounds great for pharmacists, but beware of unexpected consequences. There has to be symbiotic relationship between the chain employers and the employee pharmacists. If we keep asking for high pay, and better working conditions where we are not pumping out scripts, then our employers won't make enough money, so maybe we'll have to take a paycut.

It could even become like the unionized American auto workers. They kept on pushing for higher pay, benefits and working conditions, so much so that their companies could not compete against foreign manufacturers and went bankrupt. So in the end, everyone loses.
 
It could even become like the unionized American auto workers. They kept on pushing for higher pay, benefits and working conditions, so much so that their companies could not compete against foreign manufacturers and went bankrupt. So in the end, everyone loses.

Difference is they need us...can't outsource to Mexico.
 
Difference is they need us...can't outsource to Mexico.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. The US auto makers had contracts with the unions so that they could not outsource to cheaper labor in Mexico. They couldn't make a profit so they went bankrupt. In a similar fashion, there are laws that say the chains need us pharmacists to dispense medications. But if we keep pushing for higher pay and better working conditions, our employers won't be able to make a profit and could just give up and go bankrupt (Rite-Aid, K-Mart, Winn-Dixie watch out). There has to be a balance between employees and employers. "Don't bite the hand that feeds you".
 
Bucking the trend with you on this one, Its Z.

Sure at first glance this sounds great for pharmacists, but beware of unexpected consequences. There has to be symbiotic relationship between the chain employers and the employee pharmacists. If we keep asking for high pay, and better working conditions where we are not pumping out scripts, then our employers won't make enough money, so maybe we'll have to take a paycut.

It could even become like the unionized American auto workers. They kept on pushing for higher pay, benefits and working conditions, so much so that their companies could not compete against foreign manufacturers and went bankrupt. So in the end, everyone loses.

I'm sure some would take a pay cut for better working conditions. Stress/health is more important than money.
 
This is exactly what I'm talking about. The US auto makers had contracts with the unions so that they could not outsource to cheaper labor in Mexico. They couldn't make a profit so they went bankrupt. In a similar fashion, there are laws that say the chains need us pharmacists to dispense medications. But if we keep pushing for higher pay and better working conditions, our employers won't be able to make a profit and could just give up and go bankrupt (Rite-Aid, K-Mart, Winn-Dixie watch out). There has to be a balance between employees and employers. "Don't bite the hand that feeds you".

That would be awesome. The demand for drugs would remain...the big box stores disappear. A new renaissance in independent pharmacy would be born. Your worst nightmare is my wet dream.
 
Bucking the trend with you on this one, Its Z.

Sure at first glance this sounds great for pharmacists, but beware of unexpected consequences. There has to be symbiotic relationship between the chain employers and the employee pharmacists. If we keep asking for high pay, and better working conditions where we are not pumping out scripts, then our employers won't make enough money, so maybe we'll have to take a paycut.

It could even become like the unionized American auto workers. They kept on pushing for higher pay, benefits and working conditions, so much so that their companies could not compete against foreign manufacturers and went bankrupt. So in the end, everyone loses.
Great News!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hope Oregon state board can knock some sense in to other pharmacy boards.

pezdispenser dont be scared if Walmart can survive I am sure others can also plus patient safety should be number 1 priority.

Rest periods/meal increase productivity and in the long run are more cost effective.
Lunch is not a luxury it is a necessity
 
A great first step would be if chain pharmacy employees were barred from being on the board of pharmacy.
 
Ensure patient safety oriented working environment in retail pharmacy mandate? Corporate can double the labor volume. Nice...right? Not as long as they don't cut your compensation in half.@
 
Ensure patient safety oriented working environment in retail pharmacy mandate? Corporate can double the labor volume. Nice...right? Not as long as they don't cut your compensation in half.@

Yup yup. And then the chains think, "We could do this nationwide and advertise doubling our pharmacists on staff in the name of patient safety!". Win for the chains, win for the patients, win for all the pharmacist that don't have 100k in student loans :laugh:
 
Yup yup. And then the chains think, "We could do this nationwide and advertise doubling our pharmacists on staff in the name of patient safety!". Win for the chains, win for the patients, win for all the pharmacist that don't have 100k in student loans :laugh:

Yup,
Little too late...retail pharmacy under chain is over for pharmacists. We lost that battle. We can still salvage the health system pharmacy practice, I believe.

If anything I think this regulation will expedite the downfall of the profession.
 
Aight..I exaggerate some.....I don't believe this new law will hurt the profession but I just don't think it will help much.
 
I'm sure some would take a pay cut for better working conditions. Stress/health is more important than money.
Already happening. I did. I think MountainPharmD did. But I don't know if those new grads with $150k+ in student loans will be willing, or able to...
 
That would be awesome. The demand for drugs would remain...the big box stores disappear. A new renaissance in independent pharmacy would be born. Your worst nightmare is my wet dream.
Hey I am a proponent of the free market, so I would encourage you to open up your own independent so you can set your pay and working conditions as you wish. Alas, what is more likely to happen is the small pharmacies die/get bought out leaving a duopoly of two chains dominating the market, probably with an endless supply of indentured servants to staff their sweat shops... :eek:
 
One comment in particular via the comments section concerns me, though (I've edited some parts to condense the message):

First of all, the Board of Pharmacy created this crisis, make no mistake. I find it strange to see them suddenly backtracking on staffing requirements, since over the years they have repeatedly allowed staffing cuts. It's all about corporate profits, not public safety, and suddenly a survey of those most affected, the pharmacists, has bought light to a terrible problem. Pharmacists both hate and fear the Board of Pharmacy, and will not communicate with it any longer. Any Rx errors are hidden by corporations, with no reporting to the Board required. Pharmacists are continually forced to add money making functions for corporate profit, immunizations, cholesterol and blood pressure testing, as well as speaking to every customer about a new Rx, rather they have had the same Rx for years. They have to answer for every C-II drug pill, or any narcotic dispensed, and answer for any potential drug interaction. They now may have 10 techs force feeding them work to approve. The workload is insane. To question it means they lose their job. The suicide rate is the highest in the nation. The Board is to blame, they rule by fear and if someone has a problem they are simply allowed to reject a Senior Judges ruling, rewrite the ruling, and do as they want, without recourse. It ruined my life, and others as well. It's time to restrict their power, make them responsible for human rights violations which should be protected by the Constitution and be realistic and lawful, and protect both the public, and those great pharmacists that serve them. The Board is not that today, and that is sad, but the Governor can remedy that, and it's time to act.
How many can attest these statements are particularly true for any board-to-pharmacist relationship? Have we done this upon ourselves? Are we really screwed? :scared:
 
I went to a Florida Board of Pharmacy meeting today and comments by some of the board members show that they take a very different stance to Oregon.
- A busy work environment or not enough tech help cannot be used as mitigating excuses for med errors.
- The systems and policies of the employer cannot be blamed either, because in the board member's opinion, these systems and policies reduce med errors.
- Med errors are entirely blamed on the pharmacist.
- Furthermore, if the pharmacist has any issues with their work environment or employer that may increase the chance of med errors, it is entirely their responsibility to do something about it, or they should quit and work somewhere else ("I don't care how big your mortgage is" said one of the board members).
- This gives me the impression that the board will not regulate anything to help the pharmacists.

Any thoughts?
 
I wonder how much was he paid by the corporations to say that...

Well if every retail pharmacist under such conditions quit their job I dont think any chain pharmacy will open.
 
I wonder how much was he paid by the corporations to say that...

Most of the board members I've interacted with in my state have the same attitude. They are there 5% for the pharmacists and 95% for the public. Although one would think that they would take it upon themselves to protect the public from unsafe business practices rather than pushing it off on individual pharmacists.
 
I went to a Florida Board of Pharmacy meeting today and comments by some of the board members show that they take a very different stance to Oregon.
- A busy work environment or not enough tech help cannot be used as mitigating excuses for med errors.
- The systems and policies of the employer cannot be blamed either, because in the board member's opinion, these systems and policies reduce med errors.
- Med errors are entirely blamed on the pharmacist.
- Furthermore, if the pharmacist has any issues with their work environment or employer that may increase the chance of med errors, it is entirely their responsibility to do something about it, or they should quit and work somewhere else ("I don't care how big your mortgage is" said one of the board members).
- This gives me the impression that the board will not regulate anything to help the pharmacists.

Any thoughts?

Screw that. :thumbdown:

Anyone agree? :laugh:
 
Screw that. :thumbdown:

Anyone agree? :laugh:

bugs-florida.gif
 
Most of the board members I've interacted with in my state have the same attitude. They are there 5% for the pharmacists and 95% for the public. Although one would think that they would take it upon themselves to protect the public from unsafe business practices rather than pushing it off on individual pharmacists.
This is what I think too. I think some people have the misconception that the boards of pharmacy are there to stand up for pharmacists and lobby to advance the pharmacy profession. No, they are there to protect the public from pharmacists.
 
I went to a Florida Board of Pharmacy meeting today and comments by some of the board members show that they take a very different stance to Oregon.
- A busy work environment or not enough tech help cannot be used as mitigating excuses for med errors.
- The systems and policies of the employer cannot be blamed either, because in the board member's opinion, these systems and policies reduce med errors.
- Med errors are entirely blamed on the pharmacist.
- Furthermore, if the pharmacist has any issues with their work environment or employer that may increase the chance of med errors, it is entirely their responsibility to do something about it, or they should quit and work somewhere else ("I don't care how big your mortgage is" said one of the board members).
- This gives me the impression that the board will not regulate anything to help the pharmacists.

Any thoughts?

I would say this is typical of most State Boards. Usually the boards are filled with coporate stooges. Easy to see in your observation who sits on the Florida Board of Pharmacy.

I love when I hear the "If it is so bad you should just quit" line. Right, because quitting and walking away when you see something is wrong is always the best thing to do.
 
This is what I think too. I think some people have the misconception that the boards of pharmacy are there to stand up for pharmacists and lobby to advance the pharmacy profession. No, they are there to protect the public from pharmacists.

You are correct. However they seem blind to the fact that the conditions a pharmacist is forced to work under are a public safety issue. Its like the State Boards are stuck in 1950.
 
Top